Let's face it. Once upon a time, PC software development was fun because it wasn't driven by the twin accumulations of power and money. That has changed - dramatically, and MS, like many corporations, being driven by both, regulates the atmosphere in which the rest of us must operate. The sad part is that in the current world, even they have almost no choice anymore. The whole system has taken on a life of its own, and is just dragging us along with it.

Alan

>Craig;
>
>You bring up an interesting point. As software developers (the title changes with time) we have to have many skills. It would seem that having a degree in law would be something we may have to have to protect ourselves. We should understand what the licensing agreements mean and this is not within the realm of the average developer. In fact not even the average attorney can understand it.
>
>When I started software development on my S-100 machine 21 years ago things seemed much simpler. Even Ashton-Tate did not know much and was not trying to control the world at that time. Somehow some of the fun has left this profession. I guess we are becoming “mature”. Or is it just a case of searching for legitimacy? We are becoming sophisticated so we can show the world that in fact we are true “professionals”.
>
>This may not be the "worlds oldest profession" but it is at the bottom of the totem pole as I see it.
>
>Tom
>
>
>>The EULA in question in this thread applies to the runtimes, not the development environment. Since MS doesn't resell apps written in VFP that require the runtime, technically, MS is not requiring both. But, I'm not an attorney and certainly don't understand the law on this. I'm just giving my opinion on how I read it.
>>
>>>I don't think I understand your point. How would you propose using VFP without owning Windows. Unless you are talking about using it on someone else's pc, but then again, only on Windows.
>>>
>>>I think I just plain missed your point.
>>>
>>>Alan
>>>